Peer Review Process

The journal Moturidiylik applies a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential to ensure an unbiased and objective evaluation.

✅ Review Procedure

  1. Submission
    Authors submit their manuscripts through the online submission system of the journal.
  2. Initial Editorial Screening
    The editorial office checks the manuscript for compliance with the journal’s aims, scope, formatting requirements, and ethical standards.
  3. Plagiarism Check
    All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using appropriate anti-plagiarism software. Manuscripts with unacceptable similarity levels are rejected.
  4. Editor-in-Chief Evaluation
    The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript for originality, scientific quality, and relevance. At this stage, the manuscript may be rejected without external review.
  5. Assignment to Handling Editor
    If the manuscript passes the initial screening, it is assigned to a handling editor.
  6. Reviewer Selection and Invitation
    The handling editor invites at least two independent expert reviewers to evaluate the manuscript.
  7. Peer Review
    Reviewers assess the manuscript in terms of originality, methodology, scholarly contribution, clarity, and ethical integrity. They provide detailed comments and a recommendation (accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject).
  8. Editorial Decision
    Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editor makes one of the following decisions: acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
  9. Revision Process
    If revisions are required, authors must revise their manuscript and respond to reviewers’ comments. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the original reviewers for re-evaluation.
  10. Final Decision and Publication
    After final acceptance, the manuscript is prepared for publication. The average review period is 4–8 weeks.

✅ Transparency and Ethics

  • The peer review process is conducted in accordance with international ethical standards.
  • Reviewers are required to declare any conflicts of interest.
  • Editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit, without regard to authors’ race, gender, nationality, institutional affiliation, or ability to pay publication fees.